A sober opinion of the current state of VR for Elite Dangerous

[Orvidius]

A properly designed HMD will have the display and lenses designed to work together, where every millimeter counts. If something isn't precise, it'll look "wrong" to you, even if you can't figure out exactly why.

I got a chance to try VR back in the '90s, when it was the latest buzzword. This was with a rig that probably had a price tag in the 6 digits. They were visiting our university, and had a sort of 2-player "game", in which you moved around in a wire-frame world and tried to shoot at your opponent. It was miserable. While it was 3D with depth perception, it didn't at all feel like you were there. The depth and scale didn't match reality. The headset was heavy and bulky. The frame rate was terrible, and laggy. Aiming the guns was a nightmare, since you had to do it visually based on how you saw the gun aiming in the 3D world, not where you knew your arm to be, and they didn't match at all.

The technology has come a long way since then. I bought the Rift on a whim, during the previous price drop back in February. I figured it would be a novelty, but I was willing to give it a shot. I expected it to just be a higher resolution version of what I tried in the '90s, with better graphics. I expected it to be 3D and fun to play around with, but I didn't expect it to actually be immersive, with a sense of reality, because I thought the technology still wouldn't quite be there. Well...

I WAS BLOWN AWAY. -- And I'm not so easily impressed. I get annoyed at the limitations of technology all the time. Sure, the resolution isn't great. And I wish it accommodated glasses better (I switched to a set of lenses from VR Lens Lab, and it's good enough for now). But honestly, the field of view is pretty good, and all of the UI text in ED is readable. And more importantly, not only do you really feel like you're there, because the depth perception is correct, but also it keeps up with you and the tracking is wonderful. There's no noticeable latency unless you shake it back and forth quickly, and even then you have to look for it.

TL;DR: I'm not easily impressed by my technological toys. The Rift impressed me.

 

[etien]

I just love the VR experience on my rift (X1.4) oculus limited to 2 cores, ED on 8. Non October 7700k, 1080 gtx ti

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

Uhm... How to put this nicely...? But are you seriously expecting your report and its findings to carry any gravitas when you are basing your opinions and conclusions not on current generation consumer technology honed in the labs of multimillion dollar research and development departments, but on what you can hack together with varying mobile hones and unspecified HMD adapters?

I may come across as being snobby or elitist in this next point, but then again you snidily dismiss guys who have invested heavily in doing VR properly as being foolish fanboys just hyping it up to justify our expenditure. Regardless of the economics of it, I cannot help but think that if your HMD setup is somewhat homebrew low budget, then your gaming rig is also likely to be low budget low spec and therefore running the game at lower settings to sustain framerates. Thus your whole experience is compromised severely.

While VR is in its infancy, the screens are relatively low res for what they are trying to achieve, I mean come on - 1920*1200 at around 3" from your eyes viewed throw fresnel lenses, it needs every bit of help it can get to make it pretty. That means it needs a seriously strong graphics card to supersample the game, intensively anti-alias it and such like. Even with such a massaged signal coming from your PC going to the screen, those lenses are going to introduce subtle artefacts, but without the pre-screen massaging, those images are going to present glaringly obvious artefacts.

Your opinion of the state of play with VR will only really be valid once you have tried some of the current generation consumer version products not the hacked together ghetto phone based VR or the hardware BETA equivalent DK2. As someone who has owned a DK2, and then went onto a CV1, and then a bigger graphics card to allow me to run the game at higher settings and with HMD supersampling, I can tell you from experience that when running a CV1 with HMD supersampling enabled and at a decent setting, say 1.5/1.7, the game is good, and on occasion breathtaking, something that no homebrew kit / dk2 / low end graphics card can really deliver.

I'm in the North East of Scotland, you are welcome to PM me and arrange to meet up and I'll give you a shot of elite on my laptop with GTX1080 and CV1, and I'm sure there are others scattered throughout the forum who would be willing to let you try VR?

 

[Alex Brentnall]

^^^ this

The points the OP are trying to make are valid (I adore VR, I think it's a total game changer, but you know what ... I only play ED in VR about 10% of the time - cue cries of shock from the crowd!). There are all sorts of good reasons for this. However ... I think you might struggle to get the sensible and perfectly reasonable discussion you deserve with, as Munial so eloquently puts it ...

This!

Alec, when did you change your name to Alex?


OP:
I spent months researching and testing VR at events and places and eventually got the oculus rift CV1. Having tried phone VR, Vive, DK2, CV1 I can honestly say that the quality of DK2 vs CV1 is very noticable and the Phone VR vs the Rift/Vive is worlds away so can't be really compared hence the comments here.
But whilst your point of reference may be not as good as it could be I think you are right on the points of resolution, screen dooring etc. That will improve with time as CV2 and Vive etc keep upping their game or until the next competitor comes in a few years later and stomps all over everything

On top of the visual quality (which will come with time/tech advances) there's 2 other aspects I think VR has issues with, number 1 is the cable attachment, I find that more than anything bothers me. Number 2 is the headset comfort/weight. It has to be strapped fairly tight to your head to get the angle right and stable enough (at least in my experience), it is noticeably there and an extra weight and it's unwieldy. Maybe its me personally, I've used wireless headsets for the past 7 years so have got used to being unencumbered.


My personal big issue with VR is that I can play for about 3 hours max before I am done for the day. I feel drained. It's an amazing experience but when I get home from work (already drained), make food, do chores to keep my house in a liveable state and get to 8pm for a bit of gaming to unwind before bed I have never once reached for the rift. I have a £100 store voucher at oculus store that I haven't touched as I'm waiting for a few specific games I can play non-VR as well as VR.

The time I use the rift is at the weekend when i'm in the mood for it. I have a specific thing I want to do or see in VR and I do it. My average Elite gameplay I'll be sticking to my HD monitor as it's easy. Experiencing the aliens in VR and stuff like that is seriously second to none but when it comes to entertainment and relaxation it's is not yet a replacement.

My honest opinion: If you respect the technology and the experience and have most of your set-up already at a good point then go ahead. If you lack a good quality HD monitor or have a major upgrade like swapping HDDs for SSDs etc then you are best off spending the £500 on that first than on VR.
I'd not sell my rift but I'd not say everyone should buy it now, there is definitely a long way to go yet with VR assuming we get there eventually and don't go down the AR, hologram etc route.

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

[Auto merge / follow on post ]

One thing I must add is that the VR lower acuity is something that after a few hours of playing in VR your brain starts to compensate for. I mind a while ago I had to put my rift away for repair, and I was playing on my 65" screen at 4k. Then when the rift came back, for the next week or so, I was grooing at the granularity of the screen, about a week later my brain had compensated for it and I was back in love with the rift.

Yes its not perfect, but it is damned good, and the acuity you can compensate for subconciously and also by tweeking settings, like changing the hud colours improves text legibility, lowering hud brightness reduces screen doors / god rays from it, increasing hmd supersampling / pixel density removes a lot of the jaggies etc...

When we get 3840x2160 screens on the next generation of VR, with better lenses and a wider field of vision IRL will become obsolete. Until then we are are probably asking too much of the technology available to give us jaw dropping acuity from a resolution that was designed to look great at 10ft away on a 32" screen, that is now 3" from our eyes and under a magnifying glass.

 

[Schmack]

1st, I love baked beans. 2nd, the OP can comment on anything they like, it's just that those who have the "flagship" VR devices may know better. He doesn't sound like he's telling those people about VR, but telling those who are on the fence about getting a device that VR isn't quite "The Matrix" yet.

It's close enough to make you almost forget you're in your home office, as you reach out to touch something only for you hand to never appear in the game.

I probably won't use it all the time, my neck hurts a bit now just from flying around chasing the feds around, and using the bobble head pilot maneuvers to track them. It's amazing. It's not the resolution but the experience of being in the ship instead of in your office watching a monitor.

 

[dogbite]

In reply to BaronVondDoon

Maybe you could have posted that originally, instead of some witty analogy to baked beans. Frankly I expected this response, I'm preaching the the converted of course.

I don't mind a joke, but implying my opinion is entirely invalid after experimenting with VR set-ups for ~ 18 months is a little aggravating. My (admittedly amateur) set-up process I posted online has been viewed 8500 times and helped many set-up their own VR experiences.

As I've already said, a lot of this I suspect is people justifying their purchase decisions, I'm glad I didn't bother spending £500+ to do VR right now. Resolution isn't there for me, even on a phone with a 1440p screen and it won't be on the current Vive and Rift options, it's simply crushing numbers.

I've given my opinion, so let's just agree that we have differing expectations. Try and be a little more respectful next time?

Having read this forum daily for over a year and a half. I can say without reservation that the "VAST majority" of contributors here feel no need to justify their purchase This is true of the present VR community in many forums that I participate in. The enthusiasm should not be mistaken for zealotry. It is a sincere excitement for this tech and it's growing gangbusters. Talk about insulting remarks. That's like me suggesting your pointing out why you don't think it's good enough isn't based on the concerns you laid out, it's sour grapes because you can't afford the thing anyway. Your convoluted OP has so little to do with a properly demonstrated Rift/Touch or Vive setup that it's no surprise people flame you. Speak not of what you know not and you will draw less ire. Those interested in getting VR will find much honesty from a community of those who actually have the equipment if they read and ask questions. Someone who hasn't even tried the tech wouldn't be my first choice for that.

 

[cptwhite]

Just for reference, I could easily afford a Vive Rift and 2k PC set-up should I choose to buy them, I just don't see value in them at present.

 

[A D]

VR is great but I honestly don't see how people can accept the trade-off in visual acuity for 3D perspective for their total (or even majority) game time. I'm only a few days into VR so my opinion might change.

Fair enough, it's a personal choice. I'm happy to trade the buttery smooth 2D for the slightly pixilated 3D. VR transforms the experience and I haven't used a monitor since. If the point of your post is you don't like VR ATM, then that's OK. Just stay with 2D.

As for the game mechanics, I use a game pad and VA just as I did with a monitor before VR, so "same same" for me.

 

[Dogeh]

I have played Elite on large screen TVs, three monitor setups with TrackIr, VRidge and Riftcat using my Samsung S6 screen and none of those things compares to the Oculus Rift that I bought a week ago.
It is truly stunning. It's the little things like a 3D radar or that you actually feel part of the ship.
True - some things suck like the difficulty communicating by text or getting used to the Galaxy Map with no mouse, but the immersion overcomes those.

So I disagree with the OP.
I could never go back to flat.

 

[dogbite]

Just for reference, I could easily afford a Vive Rift and 2k PC set-up should I choose to buy them, I just don't see value in them at present.

The point that I made was an analogy to why your statement was unfounded. I could care less what you can afford. Like why current VR is so exciting to so many, you missed the point.

Your not the only one who has found VR not to be worthy of their particular attention at this time. There have been maybe 3 or 4 others who have returned theirs, post here in the last 18 months and your welcome to your opinion. However starting a thread titled "A sober opinion of the current state of VR for Elite Dangerous" when you haven't even experienced the "current state" affords your point a view no credibility. That some current VR titles are breaking the $million mark illustrate a healthy appetite for this "current state", despite the "fact" that we all have experienced what it offers in resolution, fov, pc requirements, yada yada. Statements such as "OMG, game changer, my jaw dropped to the floor, WOWW" and one I hear so often " I won't play on a monitor anymore" are not being made up to sell more headsets. These are the honest reactions of people everywhere. Your quite welcome to assume that you won't enjoy the tech based on what you have read and your experience with earlier and lessor tech. I suspect you wouldn't be satisfied, but don't put yourself out there as having a valid opinion on it

You remind me of the old joke: A guy offers a cigarette to another guy. 2nd guys says "no thanks, I tried it once didn't like it" 1st guys says "how about a beer" 2nd guys says " I don't drink. I tried it once didn't like it" 1st guys says "I guess you only have 1 kid then aye?. - At least the 2nd guys tried it once.

 

[BlackSpaceCowboy]

A sober opinion of the current state of VR for Elite Dangerous...

...I haven't tried ED with either the Vive or Rift.

oh.

lol

 

[problemchild]

I have played Elite on large screen TVs, three monitor setups with TrackIr, VRidge and Riftcat using my Samsung S6 screen and none of those things compares to the Oculus Rift that I bought a week ago.
It is truly stunning. It's the little things like a 3D radar or that you actually feel part of the ship.
True - some things suck like the difficulty communicating by text or getting used to the Galaxy Map with no mouse, but the immersion overcomes those.

So I disagree with the OP.
I could never go back to flat.

Yes, it's certainly a game changer, bad pun intended.

One thing to remember is that everything we see is 'virtual reality' anyway. Our eyes are entirely imperfect and very low resolution compared to those of a hawk, for example. The brain just fills in the gaps for us, reality is all an optical illusion.

And so it is with the OR. Upon going from my 2k screen to the Rift I immediately thought, "good god, bit grainy!", 1 minute later, sat in the cockpit of my ship the entire artifice was performing admirably. I was *in* the ship. Robo Recall and Elite Dangerous have to be the premier VR experiences available right now, no contest.

That said, the tech is entirely immature and what I use today will be replaced in 18 months or less, sold on Ebay for 75 quid including P&P, or languishing in a cupboard with my Nvidia 3d monitor and glasses. So I can understand why not everyone wants to stump up for 1st gen kit, but that does not mean its inherently bad.

 

[CylonSurfer]

OP, Your first post was funny! Well done XD

Not sure how you can have "A sober opinion of the current state of VR for Elite Dangerous" when you don't have or have never used any current HMDs to base that opinion on.... Judging VR based on a DK2 or Trinus is like telling poeple that 1080p flat screen TVs are garbage based on the B&W CRT TV your grandfather gave to you.

Just for reference, I could easily afford a Vive Rift and 2k PC set-up should I choose to buy them, I just don't see value in them at present.

Which is fine but maybe you should actually try one first?

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

The downfalls of E D in VR are not downplayed, they are either dismissed, ignored or drowned under a tidal wave of "Wow! Monitors are dead, VR is the most amazing thing in the word, like ever man!"

VR is great but I honestly don't see how people can accept the trade-off in visual acuity for 3D perspective for their total (or even majority) game time. I'm only a few days into VR so my opinion might change.

Unfortunately, by basing your opinions on non-mainstream, current equipment you leave yourself open to the sort of "jobbie" that has been thrown your way.

I don't understand how anyone can prefer a 2D miniature world you peer at through little windows compared to actually being in a spaceship, even if the VR res is lower. Personally I nearly always move my head towards the thing I'm looking at in the real world so the off centre lack of focus in VR doesn't impact on me as much as it does you.

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

Having read this forum daily for over a year and a half. I can say without reservation that the "VAST majority" of contributors here feel no need to justify their purchase This is true of the present VR community in many forums that I participate in. The enthusiasm should not be mistaken for zealotry. It is a sincere excitement for this tech and it's growing gangbusters. Talk about insulting remarks. That's like me suggesting your pointing out why you don't think it's good enough isn't based on the concerns you laid out, it's sour grapes because you can't afford the thing anyway. Your convoluted OP has so little to do with a properly demonstrated Rift/Touch or Vive setup that it's no surprise people flame you. Speak not of what you know not and you will draw less ire. Those interested in getting VR will find much honesty from a community of those who actually have the equipment if they read and ask questions. Someone who hasn't even tried the tech wouldn't be my first choice for that.

I seen the real fighter pilots over on DCS saying that VR is a very realistic representation of what it's like to fly a jet but the monitorheads just won't accept it. There seems to be a strange monitor cult out there in simulation land.

 

[Globusdiablo]

I guess I need to preface this with the acknowledgement I haven't tried ED with either the Vive or Rift...

I had a Vive, but ended up selling it again. It was truly amazing to see Elite: Dangerous in real 3D (VERY well implemented in Elite: Dangerous), but the tech is still 1. generation. The hardware is too cumbersome (and wired), and the resolution just isn't good enough, which leads back to PC hardware and pricing.

I'll be jumping back in by the second or third generation, when the tech has reached genuine consumer levels.

 

[Para Handy]

.............. If the point of your post is you don't like VR ATM, then that's OK. Just stay with 2D.

..............................

If you are going to make a reply quoting me I suggest you read what I wrote, not write what you imagine I feel. e.g, (and just from this thread):

"VR is great", "I am not sending my Rift back - I like it, it is great,", "if anyone is havering about buying-in at the £400 price, I can honestly say it is worth it", "I like the "presence" and sense of scale that ED has in my Rift".

Your grovelling apology will not be accepted so don't bother.

 

[BigDuke6ixx]

VR is great but I honestly don't see how people can accept the trade-off in visual acuity for 3D perspective for their total (or even majority) game time.

I can easily because monitors are so underwhelming. I don't see how anyone can accept higher resolution at the expense of scale, 3D and immersion.

 

[Para Handy]

I don't understand how anyone can prefer a 2D miniature world you peer at through little windows compared to actually being in a spaceship, even if the VR res is lower. Personally I nearly always move my head towards the thing I'm looking at in the real world so the off centre lack of focus in VR doesn't impact on me as much as it does you.

As I have said, there are lots of features about the VR experience in E D that I like but it isn't comfortable for me for extended periods, presumably due to my trying to accommodate the graphics issues I mentioned. When I put on the Rift to spend a little while doing things in E D or to play / indulge / experience different titles, that is fine. However I doubt I would wish to spend a few hours at a time in the Rift. I also said that as I learn how to tweak things and as I get more accustomed to the resolution / optics, that will hopefully improve.

In the end though, I feel I will probably always prefer visual acuity over 3D effects. I also said that is a personal preference, just because I "don't see how people can accept" something, is not meant as a criticism of them making such a choice, it just means I differ in that choice. Sorry if anyone thought I was criticizing their choice.

I can easily because monitors are so underwhelming. I don't see how anyone can accept higher resolution at the expense of scale, 3D and immersion.

Why would you feel the need to make the same point, quoting my same post, twice?